IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JEREMY WILCZYNSKI, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-CV-4456 

)

JO ANNE B. BARNHARDT, )

Commissioner of )

Social Security, )

)

Defendant. )

DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT

Defendant Jo Anne B. Barnhart, sued solely in her official 

capacity as Commissioner of the Social Security Administration

(hereinafter “Defendant”), by her undersigned counsel, Patrick L.

Meehan, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of

Pennsylvania, and Patricia D. Gugin, Assistant United States

Attorney for the same district, hereby answers Plaintiff’s

Complaint as follows:

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. Admitted only that plaintiff invokes various federal

statutes. This Court has jurisdiction in this action pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16. 

2. Admitted with the further clarification that venue in

this action is properly placed in the Eastern District of

Pennsylvania pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(3).

3. Admitted.

Case 2:02-cv-04456-JD Document 8 Filed 10/16/2002 Page 1 of 7
2

PARTIES

4. Admitted.

5. Admitted.

ADMINISTRATIVE PREREQUISITES

6. Denied. Plaintiff filed an EEO Complaint, Agency Case

Number 00-0360-SSA, on May 30, 2000. 

7. Admitted.

8. Admitted.

COUNT I

(Title VII-Retaliation)

9. Defendant hereby incorporates by reference 

her responses to paragraphs 1-8 of this Answer as if they were

fully set forth herein.

10. Denied. Plaintiff is employed as a GS-4 File Clerk in

the Active Files Unit of the Mid-Atlantic Social Security Center. 

The referenced memorandum speaks for itself. 

11. It is admitted only that during his employ at the MidAtlantic Social Security Center, Plaintiff participated in

matters before the EEOC. However, after reasonable

investigation, answering Defendant is without knowledge or

information sufficient to form a belief as to whether other 

facts alleged within the corresponding paragraph are true;

therefore they are denied. 

12. Denied. 

Case 2:02-cv-04456-JD Document 8 Filed 10/16/2002 Page 2 of 7
3

13. Denied. 

14. Admitted only that plaintiff denies any wrongdoing.

15. Denied. 

16(a)-(f). Denied. 

17. Denied. 

18. Denied. 

WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that the Court

dismiss the Plaintiff’s Complaint, and enter judgment against the

Plaintiff and in favor of the Defendant, together with costs and

such other relief as the Court deems just and appropriate. 

COUNT II

(Title VII-Gender Discrimination)

19. Defendant hereby incorporates by reference 

her responses to paragraphs 1-18 of this Answer as if they were

fully set forth herein.

20. The first sentence of this paragraph is admitted. All

other allegations are denied.

21. Admitted only that plaintiff denies any wrongdoing.

22. Denied. 

23(a)-(f). Denied. 

24. Denied. 

25. Denied. 

WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that the Court

dismiss the Plaintiff’s Complaint, and enter judgment against the

Case 2:02-cv-04456-JD Document 8 Filed 10/16/2002 Page 3 of 7
4

Plaintiff and in favor of the Defendant, together with costs and

such other relief as the Court deems just and appropriate. 

COUNT III

(Title VII-Racial Discrimination)

26. Defendant hereby incorporates by reference 

her responses to paragraphs 1-25 of this Answer as if they were

fully set forth herein. 

27. Admitted.

28. Denied. 

29. Admitted only that plaintiff denies any wrongdoing.

30. Denied. 

31(a)-(f). Denied. 

32. Denied. 

33. Denied. 

WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that the Court

dismiss the Plaintiff’s Complaint, and enter judgment against the

Plaintiff and in favor of the Defendant, together with costs and

such other relief as the Court deems just and appropriate.

COUNT IV

(42 U.S.C. § 1983-Deprivation of Civil Rights)

34-38. Denied. Moreover, this Count has been dismissed

with prejudice.

Case 2:02-cv-04456-JD Document 8 Filed 10/16/2002 Page 4 of 7
5

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Plaintiff has failed to allege a prima facie case of 

discrimination under Title VII based on retaliation/reprisal

because he cannot demonstrate a causal connection between an

adverse employment action and engaging in statutorily protected

activity.

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Plaintiff has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies

prior to filing this action with respected to all or part of the

claims asserted.

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

The Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s

claim that the Defendant discriminated against him when it denied

him the opportunity to work “credit hours” because he did not

exhaust his administrative remedies.

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

 The allegations of wrongdoing set forth at subparagraphs

(a), (c) and (f) of paragraphs 16, 23 and 31 do not state adverse

employment actions pursuant to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42

U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq.

 

Case 2:02-cv-04456-JD Document 8 Filed 10/16/2002 Page 5 of 7
6

 WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that the Court

dismiss the Plaintiff’s Complaint, and enter judgment against the

Plaintiff and in favor of the Defendant, together with costs and

such other relief as the Court deems just and appropriate.

 Respectfully submitted,

PATRICK L. MEEHAN

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

 

JAMES G. SHEEHAN

Assistant United States Attorney

Chief, Civil Division

 

PATRICIA D. GUGIN 

Assistant United States Attorney

Dated: October 2002

Case 2:02-cv-04456-JD Document 8 Filed 10/16/2002 Page 6 of 7
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that service of the within Defendant’s

Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint was made upon:

David M. Frazier, Esquire

224 West Albermarle Avenue

Lansdowne, PA 19050

by mailing a true and correct copy thereof, postage prepaid, on

this day of October 2002.

 

PATRICIA D. GUGIN 

Assistant United States Attorney

 

Case 2:02-cv-04456-JD Document 8 Filed 10/16/2002 Page 7 of 7